List Unlock Protocol keys held by a wallet

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does state an important behavioral trait: 'read-only' and 'via the Unlock subgraph'. However, it does not disclose return format, pagination, or the fact that expired keys are excluded by default, which is a meaningful behavior gap.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the action, scope, data source, and read-only nature.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema and the description does not explain what the tool returns or how the includeExpired parameter affects results. The claim 'every key' may mislead an agent into assuming expired keys are always included, which contradicts the schema default. The description is too sparse for a 3-parameter tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents network, walletAddress, and includeExpired. The description adds no extra param context, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema handles parameter meaning adequately.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('every Unlock Protocol key a wallet holds across locks on a network'), making the tool's function obvious. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but the scope of listing a wallet's keys is distinct from checking membership or getting a lock.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like unlock_check_membership or unlock_get_lock. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or trade-offs, so an agent must infer usage from the name and title.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.